59 replies to this topic

[AssaultPig]

my KDR in pubqueue games is ~2.0, and this is a dumb requirement. It incentivizes stupid play and is needlessly frustrating.

killing blows are essentially random in most situations, which is why PGI (wisely) don't count them for much when figuring match earnings. Why they then turn around and base event rewards on them is beyond my understanding.

[Pjwned]

Kain Thul, on 16 January 2015 - 01:31 PM, said:

Man the cry-hards are out of hand.

What tournament DOESN'T promote greedy, selfish play?

A lot of them, actually, and encouraging selfish play to such a degree always ruins matches and people always have an issue with it.

Quote

At least it doesn't require staying alive like the Victor one did (which is the reason everyone btiched about that event) so it shouldn't be hard to pull off at all.

Almost every complaint involved the kill requirement as well with the Victor challenge though, people just focused on the survival requirement too much.

[Deathlike]

Would've been nicer had PGI had used a decent match score instead...

At this point, getting the kill with the win is an issue on its own... oh well.

Should've increased the point total from 20 to 25, instead of 30.

Of course, the challenge should have been extended until Tuesday patch day (an extra day)... but whatever.

Edited by Deathlike, 16 January 2015 - 05:14 PM.

[Brody319]

I literally just had a game where I got legged early on in a locust, and got a kill. you have no excuse.

[Jolly Llama]

Pjwned, on 15 January 2015 - 06:39 PM, said:

https://mwomercs.com/tournaments



Requiring a kill in a match to get a tournament point always leads to absolutely ATROCIOUS match quality, be it sniping kills to the detriment of the rest of the team (usually by abandoning a position to get a killing shot on a lone enemy mech 700m away) or killing teammates to have a higher chance of securing an enemy kill or not targeting the enemy on radar or other such nonsense.

I'm also going to link my previous thread about the Victor challenge where I say basically the same thing I'm saying here, and I would encourage you to read this post if you check out that thread and as a bonus you can read this conversation in another thread about the same issue.



The survival criteria was actually fine because it gave people more of a reason to go for the primary objective, the problem was (and still is) that requiring a killing blow took away any focus on those objectives (and then some) due to the limited nature of killing blows meaning you need to tunnel vision a kill to the exclusion of all else if you want a tournament point, which you need 30 of this time rather than just 20 to finish it.

It really says something (negative) when even if you completely stomp the enemy team horribly (say 12-0 or 12-1 or whatever) you still won't get credit for the challenge unless you land a killing blow, which you frequently just need good luck for considering how often mechs get focus fired in this game, and if 1 person gets more than 1 kill then that just screwed a teammate out of getting a tournament point, or if some jackass on the enemy team deliberately overheats or goes out of bounds then there's another person that got screwed. Build variety also becomes a problem because if you can't deal high amounts of damage in quick bursts then you're not very likely to get a killing blow unless you solo a lone mech way off in the distance.

If there absolutely must be a combat focused requirement then make an alternative goal of something like 5, 6, or 7 assists in a match and maybe some minimum amount of damage dealt or something, because otherwise [b]requiring a kill for credit is what consistently ruins matches. Another option would be to just add the "kill most damage dealt" reward as an alternative for tournament credit so that it would still largely retain the theme of the challenge while making matches much less of a killstealing fuckfest.

It ought to be more like get rid of the win requirement. **** teams are no reason to lose out on a tourney prize.

[Pjwned]

geodeath, on 16 January 2015 - 05:37 PM, said:

It ought to be more like get rid of the win requirement. **** teams are no reason to lose out on a tourney prize.

I guess that would make things a bit easier but it sure would destroy match quality even more.

[mogs01gt]

Change the kill requirement to 75 match score o around there. Something half as much as the game's average

[PLEXI]

The format of the challenges needs to be altered to focus on personal challenges. Not something that is almost completely dependent on your team (solo queue).

Nothing is more frustrating to me than having several games in which it does not matter how well you play, you are going to lose, then follow it up with a match in which you only score 12 assists with 800+ damage. This challenge, like the others before it basically turns the game into a grind of luck to get any sort of progress.

Edited by PLEXI, 17 January 2015 - 03:14 PM.

[Kahoumono]

The optimistic side of me wants to think that they are running challenges like this to collect data to find the most atrocious builds and abused weapon types for balancing purposes. The other side has accepted that this is the direction they want to take the game. High alpha, one button mash builds in live, die, repeat with big stompy robots. I wonder how many people will stick around if this becomes the norm.

[Pjwned]

As an addendum to the thread...

I ended up grinding out the 30 points for the challenge (which I surprised myself by doing) and I will admit it was actually not nearly as bad as the Victor challenge due to not needing to survive in addition to winning and getting a kill + assist. It took me just under 50 games over several hours, and while I would prefer that future tournaments not require as many points for the grand prize, I'm not going to lie and say it was such a gigantic crappy hassle because it really wasn't; I do wonder if choosing to do it at the last minute actually helped the overall match quality though because it did seem like other people were having a crappy time after playing for quite a while.

I still don't like the killing blow requirement because it encourages crappy player behavior (in my opinion) more than it should and I still think there are other more sensible challenge criteria to use, but...

If you were one of the people who said "it's not going to be nearly as bad as the Victor challenge" here's your chance to say "I told you so" because, in my experience at least, it really was not as bad despite me thinking it would be, which is why I kept on playing I guess.

Edited by Pjwned, 19 January 2015 - 05:21 AM.

[Haipyng]

I have got to say this has been the worst challenge in memory. It's a team based game, but you have people trying to farm the challenge. Get an assist and a kill and they drop to run another mech elsewhere. Kill chasing, blocking shots. I have over 13 hours in grinding this, and only a little over 1/2 way there. I have another hour and a half to play this morning, so unlikely I will complete it. I am only at best a mediocre player, and usually play supporting mechs. This challenge turned this into a nasty grind. I'm peeved that after all that I won't get the mech, but more mad that it turned it into an very un-fun game for the weekend.

Do us a favor and don't repeat this Challenge.

Edited by Haipyng, 19 January 2015 - 05:32 AM.

[Lily from animove]

I don't think it would be good without that requirement, it would hardly be any kind of challange anymore.

yet a medium reward at maybe 15 may be a good addition to make the people a bit happy that cna not achieve the 30 but get somethign for being half way through.

[Pjwned]

Lily from animove, on 19 January 2015 - 05:36 AM, said:

I don't think it would be good without that requirement, it would hardly be any kind of challange anymore.

yet a medium reward at maybe 15 may be a good addition to make the people a bit happy that cna not achieve the 30 but get somethign for being half way through.

It could have been a pretty different kind of challenge if PGI kept the survive requirement but removed the kill requirement while still making it a decent challenge. Also, there are other criteria that PGI could use that encourage less killstealing, not as much kill hoarding which screws teammates out of tournament points, not stifling most builds that aren't high damage with at least some burst, etc.

[STEF_]

Does anybody remember that challenge requiring only assist (scratch a mech) but no kill?

lurms everywhere, er-ll, noboby wanted to take risk for a kill, etc. Worse challenge ever.

But yes, as OP said, if 1 point were achivied with 6 assist and at least 400 dmg (and the victory, too, imo) maybe we should see better matches, better gameplay/behaviour, more teamplay.

[Lily from animove]

Pjwned, on 19 January 2015 - 05:47 AM, said:

It could have been a pretty different kind of challenge if PGI kept the survive requirement but removed the kill requirement while still making it a decent challenge. Also, there are other criteria that PGI could use that encourage less killstealing, not as much kill hoarding which screws teammates out of tournament points, not stifling most builds that aren't high damage with at least some burst, etc.

in that case you would see a lot people starting to cheta the system, coming online, running around in their little hidden light, hig a empry corner, shutdown, hope for the others to win while droping in the next match.

The current system we have at leats forces people to participate for the goal.

[LordBraxton]

This tournament was IMPOSSIBLE for me to complete!

...because I only had time for ~20 rounds all weekend.

Improvement over the victor challenge, but I'd like to see the next one require win+assist+200damage

[GumbyC2C]

LordBraxton, on 19 January 2015 - 06:28 AM, said:

This tournament was IMPOSSIBLE for me to complete!

...because I only had time for ~20 rounds all weekend.

Improvement over the victor challenge, but I'd like to see the next one require win+assist+200damage

I like that one because it just encourages you to help out and get a team win. The kill requirement for this one was a PITA. I got it done but I had several 9-11 assist match wins with 500+ damage and zero kills. Maddening.

[Haji1096]

I would have liked to get 1/3 of a point for a loss when you get a kill and an assist...basically a little bit of progress for when you satisfy the kill and assist requirement but don't win.

Took me 61 matches to get the 30 qualifying wins, by playing laser vomit Stormcrows for nearly all but 4 or 5 of those wins.

[Pjwned]

Lily from animove, on 19 January 2015 - 06:21 AM, said:

in that case you would see a lot people starting to cheta the system, coming online, running around in their little hidden light, hig a empry corner, shutdown, hope for the others to win while droping in the next match.

The current system we have at leats forces people to participate for the goal.

Requiring some number of assists (meaning enemy mechs would need to die) and still requiring a win would stop a lot of that if PGI decided to make a challenge like that.

[Wrathful Scythe]

Make it one or the other.
Winning the game and archieving around 40 match score is a good system, because it is easy to archive. Of course it bears the problem that the bad matchmaker is loosing us games. I myself played around 10 matches 2 hours before the challenge ended only to get the last 2 damn points. I got kills and did much dmg but my team ****** up/enemy team was better so no point for me.
Which brings me to the next one: Make it 1 kill = 1 point or something like that. Loosing isn't a problem anymore because if I killed 3 people in my huginn while my team got smoked up... well tough luck, i got my 3 points.

Personally I favor the first one because in those tournaments I like to be more of a supporter with ECM and AMS. It helps the team greatly. But this weekend... it was Huginn/Firestarter/Direwolf all the way just to safe at least one kill.

Edited by Wrathful Scythe, 19 January 2015 - 12:21 PM.